Marketplace trust

[DannyHamilton]

The problem I have with this kind of systems is when you give someone negative feedback, because he/she messed up something, you will always get negative feedback from that person back. So you will hurt yourself.

But, feedback from untrusted people doesn't affect your score, and is specifically listed as "untrusted" feedback on the trust page.

You get to choose whose feedback you trust and whose you don't, by setting up your trust list.  Therefore, you choose whose feedback matters to you when you are investigating the possibility of doing business with someone.

[1714079051]

1714079051

[galbros]

That is based on the trust ratings from people in your trusted feedback list. If you haven't changed it, it's using the default list. It isn't universal, many different people have different people on their list, so it will be different for everyone.

You might see someone with +20, while I see him as -20 based on whose feedback I value (so I added them to my list). Point I'm trying to make is you can't control how someone else views you.

This is a great explanation.  The only thing that I can't figure is who gets added (and deleted) to/from "default trust" and why/how?  That seems to be the only thing that could be abused.  Thanks.

[iTRADEbtc]

That is based on the trust ratings from people in your trusted feedback list. If you haven't changed it, it's using the default list. It isn't universal, many different people have different people on their list, so it will be different for everyone.

You might see someone with +20, while I see him as -20 based on whose feedback I value (so I added them to my list). Point I'm trying to make is you can't control how someone else views you.

This is a great explanation.  The only thing that I can't figure is who gets added (and deleted) to/from "default trust" and why/how?  That seems to be the only thing that could be abused.  Thanks.

AFAIK users were added to default trust by Thermos because they have completed many trades on this form and have been considered to be reputable.

[sed]

That is based on the trust ratings from people in your trusted feedback list. If you haven't changed it, it's using the default list. It isn't universal, many different people have different people on their list, so it will be different for everyone.

You might see someone with +20, while I see him as -20 based on whose feedback I value (so I added them to my list). Point I'm trying to make is you can't control how someone else views you.

This is a great explanation.  The only thing that I can't figure is who gets added (and deleted) to/from "default trust" and why/how?  That seems to be the only thing that could be abused.  Thanks.

Ok, but the only think I can't figure out is how the actual numbers are calculated.  It's quite opaque, I think.  And as far as I know, it hasn't been explained anywhere.  Even if someone can just point me to the code that does the calculation, that would satisfy my curiosity.

[dontCAREhair]

Note the 21 million BTC risked ratings sent and received by CrazyRabbi. Anyone leaving those should be banned or their trust ratings deleted at least, as long as that many BTC don't yet exist.

What about leaving trust for satochi?

[Crossbow376]

That is based on the trust ratings from people in your trusted feedback list. If you haven't changed it, it's using the default list. It isn't universal, many different people have different people on their list, so it will be different for everyone.

You might see someone with +20, while I see him as -20 based on whose feedback I value (so I added them to my list). Point I'm trying to make is you can't control how someone else views you.

This is a great explanation.  The only thing that I can't figure is who gets added (and deleted) to/from "default trust" and why/how?  That seems to be the only thing that could be abused.  Thanks.

You can check it on the page https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust

Theymos controls who are in the first level of the default trust system (those trusted directly by DefaultTrust https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=122551), and then those persons can decide who are in the second level of the default trust system (those trusted by them).

[sed]

That is based on the trust ratings from people in your trusted feedback list. If you haven't changed it, it's using the default list. It isn't universal, many different people have different people on their list, so it will be different for everyone.

You might see someone with +20, while I see him as -20 based on whose feedback I value (so I added them to my list). Point I'm trying to make is you can't control how someone else views you.

This is a great explanation.  The only thing that I can't figure is who gets added (and deleted) to/from "default trust" and why/how?  That seems to be the only thing that could be abused.  Thanks.

You can check it on the page https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust

Theymos controls who are in the first level of the default trust system (those trusted directly by DefaultTrust https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=122551), and then those persons can decide who are in the second level of the default trust system (those trusted by them).

As far as I know, you can also remove "default trust" and put your own list of top level trust.  However, what about my question above: how are the numbers actually calculated?  They are so confusing.  Apart from <0 is bad and >0 is good, I have no idea how to interpret the various numbers.  For me, even Theymos has a -1 in the second number.

[hilariousandco]

That's because he got a negative feedback from someone in the trust list.

[pissedoff]

That's because he got a negative feedback from someone in the trust list.

When you get positive trust from a default trusted member does it update automatically or is it the same as activity and you have to wait 30 minutes or so. (for it to show up green that is)

[hilariousandco]

It's automatic. You can try it yourself. The feedback you leave will be 'trusted' in your eyes so it will show up as so to you or anybody who has added you to their trust list. It might not show up 'green' but you'll see a little +1.

[sed]

You guy's will forgive me if I keep bumping this question, originally asked by tspacepilot on the last page and seconded (and thirded) by me:

How to understand the details of the calculation which results in the various numbers.  There's a conceptual description on page 1, but no details (AFAIK) anywhere.  I'm just curious about how the actual numbers get calculated.

[tspacepilot]

The OP talks about how the first number is about how "consistently" the user has received positive feedback.  The second number is the number of scams.  Then the third and fourth numbers are said to increase with positive feedback with the fourth being less vunerable to abuse.  Is there any more detailed explanation about what these numbers mean?  It's not crucial I'm just curious about it.

Yup, I'm still waiting for this too.  I'm thinking now that only theymos knows, or someone else probably would have chimed in by now.

[tspacepilot]

You guy's will forgive me if I keep bumping this question, originally asked by tspacepilot on the last page and seconded (and thirded) by me:

How to understand the details of the calculation which results in the various numbers.  There's a conceptual description on page 1, but no details (AFAIK) anywhere.  I'm just curious about how the actual numbers get calculated.

The OP talks about how the first number is about how "consistently" the user has received positive feedback.  The second number is the number of scams.  Then the third and fourth numbers are said to increase with positive feedback with the fourth being less vunerable to abuse.  Is there any more detailed explanation about what these numbers mean?  It's not crucial I'm just curious about it.

Yup, I'm still waiting for this too.  I'm thinking now that only theymos knows, or someone else probably would have chimed in by now.

I'm not aware of Theymos ever making the exact calculations public.  I rarely depend on those numbers for anything anyhow. They are too easy to manipulate. I typically scan through the actual written feedback looking at what was actually written and who wrote it.

Right, I think that's what I mean, I'm wondering if he will make the calculation public so that we can have some idea how to interpret these numbers.  I agree that they can be manipulated, but that doesn't sate my curiousity about how they are produced.  I guess I could start making a bunch of alt accounts and fool around with the trust system until I figure it out by empirical reverse engineering, but it seems easier just to ask

[theymos]

I'm just curious about how the actual numbers get calculated.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=337207.0

[DannyHamilton]

I'm just curious about how the actual numbers get calculated.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=337207.0

Thanks.  Hadn't seen that before.

[tspacepilot]

I'm just curious about how the actual numbers get calculated.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=337207.0

Sweet!  That's what I was looking for!  Curiosity sated.  mmmmm.

[vertoe]

Can we sticky this thread again?

[marcotheminer]

Shouldnt this amount decrease? Just a thought.

- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

[NoobKidOnTheBlock]

So to earn a trust rating you have to have done trades with other members of the community? Is that what I am gathering from all of this?

[Korbman]

So to earn a trust rating you have to have done trades with other members of the community? Is that what I am gathering from all of this?

Consistent successful trading is the most popular way to garner trust from other members, but certainly not the only way. Think of how you'd trust someone on a daily basis offline...buying and selling goods can lead to a trustful relationship over time, but so can consistent "trustworthy" behavior (i.e. following through on your promises / keeping your word, adding value to the community, etc). Personally, I value a member's historical behavior more than I do their past trades.